Add optional InvRef to minetest.dig_node(pos)

[Sokomine]

Observed behaviour: Nodes digged with minetest.dig_node(pos) are properly digged - and then their drops are dropped as items.

NPCs and/or nodebreakers do need quite a lot of code to handle proper node digging. It is not very helpful if the items are dropped to the ground - they can't pick them up easily and thus need to implement their own functionality.

It would be very helpful if an optional target InvRef could be specified that receives the node drops. Perhaps even with the target list as a further additional parameter (or else "main").

It might also help to be able to act in the name of a given player in order to operate in protected areas.

And last, specifying a tool for the digging might sometimes be useful.

[hlqkj]

It might also help to be able to act in the name of a given player in order to operate in protected areas.

Maybe a little out of topic here, but it would be really nice to have something like minetest.create_fake_player(def) included in builtin, to be used to get a valid puncher in such situations. Mods created their own implementations over time (e.g. see the pipeworks mod) but would be nicer to have a standard API for that imho.

[Sokomine]

Such a fake player function inside MT would definitely be great and help NPC mods as well - even in more situations than just dig_node.

[hlqkj]

Also, adding a digger param to minetest.dig_node(...) would help your case, as digger would (optionally) expose both the wielded item and an InvRef of the "fake" player.
And of course a player name too, so you can impersonate one and still be able to check the protection.

Same applies to punch_node(...) of course.

I like the idea of being able to specify in which inventory list to put the drops, though!

[Emojigit]

I suggest: minetest.dig_node(DiggerRef) EDIT: minetest.dig_node(pos,DiggerRef)
DiggerRef can be:

• ItemStack, apply the special effect of the tool (for example, Fortune of MineClone2) to the digging event, the player name is blank while checking protections.
• Entity, check protection with its player name if it is a player, otherwise check with a blank name. Then, use it wield item or his "hand" to break that node.
• string that contains a player name.

[wsor4035]

I suggest: minetest.dig_node(DiggerRef)
DiggerRef can be:

• ItemStack, apply the special effect of the tool (for example, Fortune of MineClone2) to the digging event, the player name is blank while checking protections.
• Entity, check protection with its player name if it is a player, otherwise check with a blank name. Then, use it wield item or his "hand" to break that node.
• string that contains a player name.

this will break backwards compat, it is better to add additional parameters as sokomine originally suggested

[hlqkj]

this will break backwards compat, it is better to add additional parameters as sokomine originally suggested

How so? Just adding digger as an additional parameter that behaves like @Emojigit suggested would mean older code just keeps functioning like it is now by just ignoring that parameter.

Adding discrete params like initially suggested is limiting in conparison to all the stuff that can be included in a "DiggerRef" imho...

EDIT: to be even clearer on what I mean, I'm talking about re-using a PlayerRef as digger -- not inventing anything new. That "object" already has all the needed stuff to implement things like digging with a specific wielded item, an inventory into which place drops, a "player" name to check protection, etc.

[wsor4035]

How so? Just adding digger as an additional parameter that behaves like @Emojigit suggested would mean older code just keeps functioning like it is now by just ignoring that parameter.****

they are suggesting DiggerRef as the only parameter with 3 types in it. this WILL break mods that expect minetest.dig_node to accept only a pos. as Sokomine suggested originally, adding a additional optional field will keep backwords compatibility

EDIT: not to mention there idea fails to include a pos input at all for the node to be dug

[hlqkj]

Granted, my bad. I assumed they were meaning to add a parameter...

[Emojigit]

this will break backwards compat, it is better to add additional parameters as sokomine originally suggested

Updated my suggestion to make backwards compat